Personal Insights on Learning Theory & Technology in Practice

When I began the quest for a better understanding of learning theories seven weeks ago, my professor asked me to share my preferences for personal learning. My response deliberately encompassed preferences for cross-modal delivery of information in visual, auditory, expository, and kinetic forms. I have since learned that these preferences have more to do with learning styles than learning theories which explain how learning occurs. I also expressed an awareness of neuroscience citing brain-based learning as a preference because its practices accommodate physiological realities. For instance, I knew that instruction should be designed to address limited attention spans for students because I had been previously informed by Jensen (1998) that during acquisition, people can generally remain attentive for the length of their age in minutes. I had also found this to be true in my own experience. Having gained a better understanding of theory, I now have more ammunition to meet the needs of diverse learners and varied learning situations.

In studying traditional as well as more contemporary learning theories, I find that the proof is in the results of application. In fact, education professionals, by and large, agree that learning theories must meet several criteria, not the least of which is universal application (testing). Ormrod et al (2009) outline the criteria noting that learning theories must have:

1) A set of explicit assumptions that address aspects of learning
2) Specific principles derived from those assumptions that can be tested through research
3) Explicit definitions of key terms
4) Explanation(s) of underlying psychological dynamics of the events that influence learning

Ertmer & Newby (1993) corroborate this understanding, suggesting that learning theories are a source of verified instructional strategies, tactics, and techniques. When a theory yields predictable results, its practices become tools that can be applied to learning experiences for the purpose of achieving specific learning outcomes.

Traditional learning theories include Behaviorism, Cognitivism, and Constructivism. The former two meet with all of the criteria listed above, but the latter has shortcomings in that it does not fully address psychological and cognitive factors that influence learning. We still use behaviorist techniques like providing reinforcements in some learning environments because they work. Cognitivists principles are derived from scientific investigation. For instance, through empirical studies we know that only a certain amount of information can be retained in short term memory (STM) without rehearsal. The practical implication for teaching is that students need processing time and practice in order for effective learning to take place. Constructivists reject the notion of scientific truth (Ormrod et al, 2009) in favor of knowledge as a construct unique to each individual and heavily dependent upon cultural as well as environmental factors. The unifying thread between Cognitivism and Constructivism is that both theories place the learner in the center of the learning equation. One theory explains how our brains process information while the other explains how we learn in the context of environmental factors like language and expert guidance. Having worked in a school that promoted constructivists techniques and having recently been immersed in research on constructivist thought, I’m convinced that the theory has relevance as an epistemology (belief system about learning) rather than a theory. I don’t intend to throw costructivists practices out with the wash, but I will use them carefully when they are appropriate for the learning goal and environment.

Some of the more contemporary learning theories like Social Learning and Connectivism are extensions of constructivists thought with applications for experiential learning and the information age. For example, social learning theory posits that all meaningful learning occurs when individuals are engaged in social activities (Kim, 2001). This is a major tenet of Constructivist theory, but Social Learning theory is centered around experiential learning and apprenticeship/community arrangements where the environment affects the individual as the individual affects the environment. Bandura (1978) terms this relationship reciprocal determinism. I view Connectivism theory as constructivism on steroids. As a result of opportunities provided by the World Wide Web, we now construct knowledge with influence from more knowledgeable others (MKOs) who might be anywhere in the world. And because we have to manage so much information, we now store knowledge in our brains as well as on non-human devices.

Learning theory applied to the adult as a unique type of learner, lends more insight for instructional design. Research in this area reveals that motivation, prior experience, and self-direction immensely impact the learning process for adults because most adults are self-motivated and self-directed. They want to participate in determining how they learn. Adults also learn better when information is relevant to their current circumstances and can be implemented immediately (Conlan et al, 2003).

I’ve been enlightened because I can now attach the practices associated with theory to learning goals. I know rehearsal is primarily a behaviorist technique and that drill and practice is most appropriate when the goal is conditioned response. Studies have also shown that behaviorist techniques are very effective with developmentally and learning disabled students (Ormrod et al, 2009). Elaborating, aggregating information, and the use of schemata are cognitive practices that are best applied when problem-solving and organization are needed. Discussions and group projects are constructivist methods that encourage socialization and can be used to invite multiple perspectives.

Beyond the provision of a foundation for effective instructional design, exposure to the evolution of theory has endowed me with access to new technologies that will strengthen my ability to expand learning sources while providing interesting opportunities for practice. Some of the most interesting emerging technologies for education professionals are presented annually in The New Media Consortium’s Horizon Report at http://wp.nmc.org/horizon2009/.


Reference List:

Bandura, A. (1978), The Self-System in Reciprocal Determinism, American Psychologist, Vol. 33, No. 4 (pp. 344 – 358), Retrieved 12/19/10 from http://des.emory.edu/mfp/Bandura1978AP.pdf

Conlan, J., Grabowski, S., Smith, K. (2003), Adult Learning. In M. Ored (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved 11/10/10 from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/

Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4), 50–71.

Jansen, E. , (1998), How Julie’s Brain Learns, Educational Leadership, v56 n3 pp. 41-45

Keller, J.M. , 1999, Using the ARCS Motivational Process in Computer-Based Instruction and Distance Education, New Directions for Teaching and Learning, no. 78, Josey-Bass Publishers

Ormrod, J., Schunk, D., & Gredler, M. (2009). Learning theories and instruction (Laureate custom edition). New York: Pearson

Connectivism 101

Blogs, Wikis, RSS Feeds, half-life of knowledge, communities of practice – what is all this stuff, and why does an educator need to know? Until recently, I thought web 2.0 was a new software, but a simple Google search enlightened me to the fact that it’s actually a concept referring to web based applications that allow for collaboration and interaction as opposed to simply viewing page content. I need to know about these applications because tech-savvy students know about them and use them. As a point of interest, 80% of adult learning is now taking place outside of the classroom (Suave, 2007). It stands to reason that formal education environments have to acknowledge a paradigm shift if they are to remain relevant in our changing world.

Traditional learning theories include behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism. Behaviorism explains learning in terms of variables in the environment including reward and punishment to produce desired outcomes. Cognitivism focuses on the process of learning as we perceive, synthesize, and recall information. And finally, constructivism calls attention to social learning where culture, language, and community impact an individual’s learning construct. Each of these theories offers valuable insights as we learn about learning. It is critical, however, to consider that what we know today may be irrelevant or obsolete tomorrow. We live in exponential times where new information is learned and produced at rates faster than ever before. In addition to this abundance of information, the World Wide Web affords us opportunities to more readily share our experiences. In short, the way we learn is being transformed by technology.

This fundamental paradigm shift has been happening for the past twenty years, but George Siemens, very aptly explores the phenomenon, resources, and dynamics as they influence learning. In his 2005 article, Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age, he describes learning as a network phenomenon, influenced (aided) by socialization and technology. Connectivist terms help us to better understand the theory so I’ll share a few of them:

Half-life of knowledge - the time span from when knowledge is gained until it becomes obsolete (Gonzalez, 2004)

Communities of Practice (COPs) - Networks of people with similar interest creating collective knowledge (Fenwick & Tennant, 2004)
Chaos Theory – A key learning task is the ability to adjust as patterns shift (Siemens, 2005)

Personal Learning Network (PLN) – a group of people who can guide your learning, point you to learning opportunities, answer your questions, and give you the benefit of their own knowledge and experience (Tobin, 1998).

I shared my own personal learning network in my last blog post, but I’ll elaborate on some of the most useful nodes in the network as you may find them useful also. First of all, Walden University is supplying me with information and technological skills that are right in line with my goal of training in a corporate or adult education setting. Of course, this is not a free resource, but I am impressed with the experience of the instructors and the courses. The curriculum is very challenging, but definitely rewarding. Secondly, I have connected to professional trainers and educators by subscribing to their blogs. I can simply go to their blog sites, and if I find that the content will be useful on an ongoing basis, I can click on the RSS feed button to add the blog to my feeds. Any updates would be delivered to my computer when I go online. Since I’m subscribing to so many blogs, I use Google Reader to aggregate them. Thanks to Blogspot, I am now doing my own personal blog. Communities of Practice for me include members of ASTD (American Society for Training & Development), my Walden classmates, and NSRF (National School Reform Faculty). NSRF promotes professional development in schools through community collaboration. I received critical friends group (CFG) certification through their programs in 2008. My professional profile can be located on LinkedIn . I use this site for professional networking.

Connectivism is a learning theory well suited to the information age. It recognizes that, “. . . the act of learning does not happen in a vacuum. It is at the intersection of prior knowledge, experience, perception, reality, comprehension, and flexibility that learning occurs (Davis, et al, 2008).” As we participate in learning and educating in the information age, maintaining personal networks that are relevant to our unique interests and needs will be critical to our development. Siemens (2005) puts it this way, “The pipe is more important than the content within the pipe. Our ability to learn what we need for tomorrow is more important than what we know today. As I continue my academic and professional journey, my network will grow. I hope that yours will also.

Reference List

Davis, C., Edmunds, E., & Kelly-Bateman, V. (2008). Connectivism. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Connectivism

Fenwick,T. & Tennant, M., Chapter 4, “Understanding Adult Learners” In Foley, G. (Ed.). (2004). Dimensions of adult learning: Adult education and training in a global era. McGraw-Hill Education.

Siemens, G (2005), Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age, International Journal of Instructional Technology & Distance Learning, Retrieved from: http://www.itdl.org/journal/jan_05/article01.htm
Sauve, E. (2007). Informal knowledge transfer. T+D, 61(3), 22–24

Tobin, D., (1998) "Building Your Personal Learning Network", Retrieved from: http://www.tobincls.com/learningnetwork.htm

Get Connected

Adult education is unique in many ways, but one of the most critical characteristics of the adult learner is intrinsic motivation. Most adults are learning because they recognize the benefits of attaining knowledge. In many cases, they have an immediate need to know and ideas about how they will use new information. Motivated adults want to participate in planning their learning so it’s meaningful and relevant to their needs.

Over the last few months, I've been planning my continuing education by getting connected and contributing. Learning theorists call this kind of learning Connectivism. It's an education model that promotes learning through connections that might not have been possible decades ago. We now have the means to learn formally and informally. We learn through our every-day practice, and we can learn from the practice of others if we are willing to venture out of our comfort zones. I’ll share more on this theory in my next post, but for now, click on the link below to take a look at my learning network.

http://www.mywebspiration.com/view/670433a2a0c6

Practical Implications of Brain Research & Cognitive Theory

Cognitive theories of instruction have been proliferated in the learning community in recent years and with good reason. Beyond animal research with rats and mazes, researchers now have tools to help them delve deeper into the brain's functioning. With new technologies, methodologies for brain research now include imaging technologies from neuroimaging (recording pictures of blood flow during certain activities) to electrical recording (use of electrodes to record brain wave patterns). Post-mortem and living case studies of people with brain injuries and psychological conditions have also been prominent in recent studies (Ormrod, Schunk, and Gredler, 2009). From this body of research, we know that humans have limited capacity for retaining information in short-term memory (STM) and that information is best learned when it is transferred to long-term memory (LTM) with elaboration and meaningfulness. Elaboration occurs when information is retrieved from the LTM in order to link to new information (Orey, 2001). There is also emerging evidence that mirror neurons fire when we watch someone else perform an action or when we perform it ourselves (Ormrod, Schunk, and Gredler, 2009). These discoveries have spurred the development of information processing theories far and wide, and have tremendous implications relative to experiential or apprentice style learning.

Information processing theories, in and of themselves, focus on how information is attended to, perceived, synthesized, and retrieved. Most use the computer metaphor, likening our sensory registers to input devices, our short-term memories to a central processing unit, and our long-term memories to hard drives (Orey, 2001). Other models discuss the processing of information in terms of physical, acoustic, and semantic levels with the semantic level of processing yielding the greatest learning and recall. In short, we can perceive, rehearse and hear, but we have learned when we understand. The learner attaches meaning to new information at the semantic level (Craik, 1979, Craik & Lockhart, 1972). In processing information, other theorists believe it is helpful to understand the type of knowledge being acquired: episodic, semantic, verbal, visual, declarative or procedural (Tulving 1972, 1983; Gupta & Cohen, 2002). What does this research mean for me as a practitioner?

From my experience, I know that students learn better when we can activate their prior knowledge and provide metacognitive tools to help them think about their learning. When I taught English and business applications, these tools included baseline testing as well is simple verbal checks at the beginning of lessons. For example, use of the prompt, “Tell me everything you know about . . .” could lead to intense discussions that let me know where my students were regarding subject matter as well as their interest level(s). Formal instruments or schemata for activating prior knowledge and guiding learning would include KWL Charts (Ogle, 1986), reading logs, and organizers. With regard to opportunities to practice learning, the recent developments concerning mirror neurons informs us that learning is more meaningful when it is visualized and/or practiced. I know this to be true from working in a project-based learning environment. My students learned business principles, but also practiced them as they created their own business plans and publications.

The goal of learning is to retain it for current or future application. As much as content is important, we have an imperative to help students learn how to learn. Evidence relative to the benefits of metacognitive strategies is rapidly mounting and should give us confidence to spend more time in this area as we plan our instruction. Two studies of note are Houtveen & Van de Grift (2007) and Marshall (2009). The studies are at opposite ends of the spectrum regarding participants, but each offers valuable insight on the benefits of metacognitve tools. Houtveen and Van De Grift studied hundreds of elementary teachers and students over two years with an experimental group being trained to teach and use metacognitive strategies in reading comprehension. The experimental group outperformed the control group and sustained these gains when tested in the same subject matter for the next year. Marshall (2009) explores the compatibility of cognitive and practice-based theories through a case study on an engineering project. He successfully illustrates how the two theories can be integrated in practice.

Reference List:

Craik, F.I.M. (1979), Human Memory, Annual Review of Psychology, 30, 63 – 102

Craik, F.I.M., & Lockhart, R.S. (1972) Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671 – 684

Gupta, P. & Cohen, N. J. (2002). Theoretical and computational analysis of skill learning, repetition priming, and procedural memory. Psychological Review, 109, 401-448.

Houtveen A.A.M., Van de Grift, W.J.C. (2007), Effects of Metacognitive Strategy Instruction and Instruction Time on Reading Comprehension, School Effectiveness and School Improvement, Vol. 18, No.2, June, 2007, pp. 173 – 190

Marshall, N. (2009), Cognitive and Practice-based Theories of Organizational Knowledge and Learning: Incompatible or Complementary?, Management Learning April 1, 2009 40: 129-144

Ogle, D. (1986). K-W-L: A teaching model that develops active reading of expository text. The Reading Teacher, 39, 564-571.

Orey, M. (2001). Information processing. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Information_processing

Ormrod, J., Schunk, D., & Gredler, M. (2009). Learning theories and instruction (Laureate custom edition). New York: Pearson

Tulving, E. (1972). Episodic and semantic memory. In E. Tulving & W. Donaldson (Eds.), Organization of memory, (pp. 381–403). New York: Academic Press.

Tulving, E. (1983). Elements of Episodic Memory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Information - A Springboard for Collaboration

There is a growing phenomenon toward collaborative learning in the workplace.  This phenomenon reaches beyond the borders of offices and educational institutions and leverages the resources of a global community.    The Learning Power Pad is my personal attempt at pooling collective intelligences and contributing to a global community of education / training and development professionals.   As an educator and 21^st century learner, I plan to chronicle experiences, insights, and practical wisdom relevant to professionals and academics in this field.   

My perspective is unique in that I’ve worked in Corporate America for more than 18 years – primarily in sales and customer service management.   Throughout my career, I’ve fallen into roles that require training and coaching skills.  I suppose this is because nurturing the development of others comes naturally for me.   Recently, I’ve worked as a project manager and facilitator in an urban business high school, and I’ve done training & development as a major function of managing U.S. Census Bureau staff.   I’m pursuing formal graduate studies in instructional design to build greater capacity for doing the work that I love.  

Since the focus of this blog page is informal learning and collaboration, I’ll start by providing a few links to information that you might find useful: 

Suite101.com: Training & Professional Development

Find tips on soft skills development topics like time management, goal setting, team building, and the like.   You can also find design and assessment tools.  You may subscribe to the site in general and/or specific blogs.  

Practical Theory

Having taught in a progressive urban high school, Chris Lehmann’s Practical Theory blog is of particular interest to me.   Lehmann is the founding principal of the Science Leadership Academy in Philadelphia, PA. The Academy employs a project-based program of instruction much like the one that I operated in for the business high school in Milwaukee.   The school has received numerous awards since its founding in 2006 and, amongst other accomplishments; the founder was named one of the "30 Most Influential People in EdTech" by Technology & Learning Magazine in 2010.    

Chris Lehmann’s blog covers topics from current news in education, assessment trends, and the integration of technology into the process of learning.    Other posts have addressed topics like plagiarism, paying for college, and Google applications. 

The Learning Circuits Blog

ASTD (American Society for Training & Development) is a member organization committed to providing resources to professionals in industrial and other workforce training environments.   The organization has several blogs and discussion board, but this one in particular, is dedicated to e-learning topics.    The goal of the Learning Circuits website is, “to promote and aid the use of e-learning, creating a body of knowledge about how to use technology efficiently and effectively for learning.” 

The Official ASTD Blog

ASTD (American Society for Training & Development) also has an official blog that is more news oriented.   Here, you can discover what’s working for training and development practitioners and which companies are leading the industry in innovations and performance.